Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.

Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.


+1 vote
Maybe they dont personally prevent these crimes very often but doesn't the existence of the police deter at least some people from committing atrocities and attacking others?

3 Answers

+4 votes
i'm setting up a dumb, unmeasurable comparison, but, based on  information about the number of cops who are violent against their partners/wives, as well as racist violence, etc., i bet that police commit as many crimes as they deter (how would you know how many crimes they deter?).

also, the existence of an alien force that holds all the responsibility for maintaining social values means that people both expect too much of that force, and can't take care of their/our own problems.
by (53.1k points)
actually, if you compare the number of people the police kill and the size of the policing population, and compare that rate to the number of homicides that occur in the US vs. the US population, the US population commits far fewer homicides...however, the screwy thing is that the police don't count the people they kill as homicides all the time, im just going by the "justifiable homicides" statistic tabulated by the FBI
–1 vote
As dot said, it's a common topic. The simplest answer is that it's better to take away the motivation for the crime, rather than enforce ineffective punitive measures. It's why pro-life people rarely make sense to me; they also frequently dislike contraception and comprehensive sex-ed. Wouldn't it be better, if you dislike abortion, to prevent the need for it in the first place? But I digress.

The reduced motive for economic crime is obvious, as for things like rape, assault, etc. these things are often the result of patriarchal or white supremacist cultures, toxic masculinity, etc. which the state and to a greater degree capitalism upholds. It's easier to sell us shit when we have discreet genders, interests, and levels of aggression.

This is also why I have no use for anarchy that ignores gender and race issues.
by (370 points)
edited by
I don't understand your answer or what abortion has to do with the question. Rape and homicides occur in other cultures besides white peoples.
Abortion is just the simplest example of people not caring about actually preventing what they view as a negative act from occurring, all they want to do is feel self righteous about punishing it. If pro life people really cared about stopping abortion, they would try and remove the reasons why it happens in the first place.

Abortion isn't a crime, and it shouldn't be, but this concept relates directly to how society views crime. They don't really care about less crime that much, not if reducing crime would cost them anything, they just want to know it gets punished, whether or not this deters more criminals. So this idea of anarchy not having as effective a policing force for punishing murderers may be true, but if it prevents more murders from happening in the first place, I'd say that's a superior system.
0 votes
If there was no police I predict people would find safety in numbers and defend each other in groups, they would probably live in small communities together and self-govern. The people that would be running around and murdering random people would be a minority and would probably be alone or with few other people and would be dealt with.
by (160 points)
What happens when said autonomous communities conflict with one another?
when there is conflict, there is conflict. the parties involved determine what happens in any given conflict. which will obviously vary base on the specific circumstances.